The survival of Class V restorations in general dental practice. Part 2, early failure

Stewardson, Dominic; Thornley, P.; Bigg, Tom; Bromage, C.; Browne, Anthony; Cottam, Daniel; Dalby, D.; Gilmour, Jill; Horton, J. N.; Roberts, E.; Westoby, L.; Creanor, Siobhan; Burke, Trevor

doi:10.1038/sj.bdj.2011.430

Cited by 16 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…When compared with the findings of our previous analysis conducted after two years, the results have suggested that most of the factors influencing the time to failure across five years were the same as the factors identified as influencing the probability of failure within two years of placement, 22 although the rate of failure was not consistent over the five years. Increasing cavity size did not appear to affect two-year failure but reduced the time to failure of restorations over five years.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 57%

“…This series of three papers 20,22 demonstrates that general practitioners working in partnership with academics in a group such as BRIDGE (Birmingham Research In General Dental practice) have the capacity to initiate, design and carry out substantial research projects. It also illustrates the potential of practice-based research to generate larger amounts of relevant information than is usually produced from other clinical study settings.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The survival of Class V restorations in general dental practice: part 3, five-year survival

Stewardson

Creanor

Thornley³

et al. 2012

Br Dent J

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 57%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The survival of Class V restorations in general dental practice: part 3, five-year survival

Stewardson

Creanor

Thornley³

et al. 2012

Br Dent J

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Between the materials, resin modified glass ionomer recorded the smallest percentage of early failure. Retention of RMGI was reported at 91.4%, when composite resins showed 85.3% in the same study [ 10 ]. In general, retention rates for resin composite restorations are lower in comparison with resin modified glass ionomer restorations [ 10 ].…”

Section: Glass Ionomer Cement: Retention In Nccl and Longevity In mentioning

confidence: 89%

“…Retention of RMGI was reported at 91.4%, when composite resins showed 85.3% in the same study [ 10 ]. In general, retention rates for resin composite restorations are lower in comparison with resin modified glass ionomer restorations [ 10 ]. A clinical trial was designed to evaluate the two-year clinical performance of a one-bottle etch-and-rinse bonding system associated with a hybrid resin composite compared with a resin modified glass ionomer cement (RMGIC) in NCCL.…”

Section: Glass Ionomer Cement: Retention In Nccl and Longevity In mentioning

confidence: 89%

Glass Ionomer Cements for the Restoration of Non-Carious Cervical Lesions in the Geriatric Patient

Kampanas

Αντωνιάδου

2018

JFB

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: The restoration of non-carious cervical lesions in geriatric patients is a demanding process. Glass ionomer cements can be promising materials for the management of these lesions in older adults. The aim of this literature review is to present the benefits of glass ionomers and how they can be used for the restoration of non-carious cervical lesions of older adults depending on the geriatric patient’s profile. Data sources: All available in vitro and in vivo studies from Google Scholar, PubMed and Scopus search engines corresponding to glass ionomer cements, geriatric dentistry, elderly patients, and non-carious lesions as key words were reviewed. Data synthesis: The advantages of glass ionomer cements, such as good retention and fluoride release, make them suitable for the restoration of non-carious cervical lesions. However, several factors related to the geriatric patient’s profile determine the most suitable material type. Conclusion: In general, the resin modified glass ionomer cements (RMGICs) appear to be preferred, but under certain circumstances the use of the conventional product is more appropriate, despite its poorer mechanical features. Further studies are required for more reliable data analysis and clinical interpretation of the relevant results.

show abstract

“…Historically non-carious cervical lesions (NCCL) and occlusal dentin defects due to attrition have been harder to restore than class 1 and 2 stress-bearing lesions [3,4], because flex and compression can occur simultaneously on a tooth with eccentric occlusal loading [5]. Although, with the improvements in adhesive technology, NCCL restored with 2 step self-etching adhesive were recently reported to have a 96% retention rate after 13 years [6].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

In vitro evaluation of adhesive characteristics of 4-META/MMA-TBB resin with organic filler

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Dentin Self etching a b s t r a c tObjectives. A commercial restorative material, BondfillSB (BF), is a modification of 4-META/MMA-TBB resin cement. BF uses a self-etching primer and added pre-polymerized organic fillers. We compared BF with another self-etching system, EasyBond (EB), in shear bond strength, bonded interface characteristics to human dentin and contraction gap when used in bulk-filling.Methods. Shear bond strength of BF and EB + Z100 (Z), bonded by different experience-level operators, was evaluated. Bonded interfaces were characterized by SEM, AFM, and AFM based nano-indentation. Contraction gaps (CG) at 0 h and 24 h after polymerization were evaluated for BF or EB bulk filled class I cavities. To meet the clinical recommendation, BF's powder was replaced by experimental radioopaque powder (BFO) for the CG study. EB was used with Z (EBZ) or with a resin marketed for bulk-fill base (SureFil-SDR-flow (EBSF)).Results. Shear bond strengths (Mean ± Standard Deviation (S.D.)) of BF (37.4 ± 2.6 MPa; n = 36) were higher and less variable than EBZ (18.2 ± 7.6 MPa; n = 36) (p < 0.0001, One-way ANOVA).Weibull characteristic strength (Á) differed significantly between materials (p < 0.0001) but not between operators (p = 0.90). EBZ often had non-uniform interfaces and a wider band of reduced elastic modulus (E) of greater than 20 m across the interface. BF had uniform interfaces and a smaller width of affected dentin under the interface (∼1 m). There was a difference in dentin-E between EBZ and BF up to 9 m from the interface (mixed-effects model; P = 0.03). A stratified linear regression model used for CG. EBSF and BFO showed significantly smaller CG than EBZ at time 0. None of three combinations showed any significant change between 0h-CG and 24h-CG.Significance. BF possessed bonding characteristics required to serve as a restorative.

show abstract

The survival of Class V restorations in general dental practice. Part 2, early failure

Cited by 16 publications

References 21 publications

The survival of Class V restorations in general dental practice: part 3, five-year survival

The survival of Class V restorations in general dental practice: part 3, five-year survival

Glass Ionomer Cements for the Restoration of Non-Carious Cervical Lesions in the Geriatric Patient

In vitro evaluation of adhesive characteristics of 4-META/MMA-TBB resin with organic filler

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About